by Prof. Eyal Zisser
Obama has left Trump a chaotic Middle East, where the U.S.'s role has been continuously eroded and has taken a back seat to Russia.
The unprecedented slump
in the United States' position in the Middle East during President
Barack Obama's eight-year term was such that the only way is up. This is
perhaps the only bright spot President-elect Donald Trump can hold on
to when examining the complex regional realities ahead of formulating
new Middle East policies.
The majority of Middle
East leaders welcomed Trump's election. Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and
even Syria, all hope to turn over a new leaf in their relations with the
American administration, and it seems they would also welcome different
policies, they kind that would restore Washington's active involvement
in the region.
When Obama took office
in 2008, the Bush administration left him a stable Middle East, where
the U.S. was a key player -- the only player, to be honest.
President George W.
Bush's fight against the axis of evil stretching from Tehran to Damascus
and involving Hezbollah and Hamas, may not have yielded the desired
results, but it generated considerable deterrence opposite Iran and its
allies, and stopped them from threatening Washington's allies in the
region.
Obama has left Trump a
chaotic Middle East, where the U.S.'s role has been continuously eroded
and has taken a back seat to Russia.
Russian President
Vladimir Putin has made Iran a key partner in his efforts to cement
Moscow's foothold in the region, and in exchange, Tehran has been given
free rein in areas Putin cannot reach. The ones paying the price for
this regional shift are, naturally, Washington's allies.
Upon taking office,
Obama set out to win over the hearts and minds of the Arab public, and
chose to do to so by turning his back on Arab rulers, as well as on
Israel. Simultaneously, Obama sought to appease U.S. enemies in the
Middle East, primarily Iran, in an effort to reach an understanding that
would guarantee his administration smooth regional sailing.
Once the Arab Spring
erupted in full force, Obama distanced himself from the region, focusing
only on promoting the nuclear deal with Iran, despite knowing it will
eventually enable Iran to realize its nuclear ambitions. The only other
regional issue to garner his interest was the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict -- an issue that barely holds any regional significance anymore
-- but even here, his involvement was little more than lip service.
Trump has inherited a
region where crises may appear to be contained locally, with little to
no bearing on American interests, but in the long run, these issues
could prove dangerous and have far-reaching implications.
While Trump has the
option of carrying on with Obama's policies in the Middle East, the
president-elect will have to deal with several dilemmas. The first
question involves the ramifications of the U.S.'s weakness in the Middle
East, especially opposite Russia, in respect to American interests in
other areas, such as Eastern Europe or central and southeastern Asia.
The second issue is the question of whether the policy of
noninterference at any cost does indeed spare American soldiers' lives
as well as the lives of the people of the region, or whether the
opposite true, and a more aggressive policy would meet the challenges
U.S. interests in the region are facing.
Trump could leave Russia and Iran
to clobber Islamic State and the Syrian rebels, and effectively
establish a joint Iranian-Russian hegemony in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and
Lebanon. He could ignore the plight of Egypt and Saudi Arabia and push
them into Russia's or Iran's arms. In one respect, however, Trump should
adopt Putin's conclusions: to fight against radical Islam and undermine
Iran's regional aspirations on Middle East soil, not U.S. soil.
Prof. Eyal Zisser
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=17633
Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment